Indeed, we are saying the same thing
?? Isn’t SRAAM like 50+G already ?
If you are saying that IRIST-T should be pulling 100g, I’d need to see proofs.
Tbf even with a MAW, you are simply warned of your impending death. It’s overall very hard to flare IIR missiles as of now even above 6km from my experience (rear aspect), and a few km head on
I don’t get where people are even getting 100gs even from.
Highest number confirmed I’ve seen was 50gs from a presentation.
And 60 gs from that one swdish presentation
Unless its a Typo he probably means SRAAM as in the missile on the Harrier GR1/ Hunter F6 and not ASRAAM.
based upon "5 times the range " I would guess that is the case. As SRAAM is 3km and IRIS-T is more like 15km. (effective range not absolute max range)
SRAAM is only 20Gs currently. Id assume IRIS-T is around 60Gs. so actually triple
yeah, i was confusing the fact that sources state it has performed a 50 g turn vs its max of 60 gs, 60 gs would make more sense as that would match r73, would be odd for germany to make a missile that didn’t even match its previous missile
Statcard says 35 or something I thought and i’d assumed it would be ballpark and I could’ve sworn i’d seen 70g somewhere, so the same as magic 2, also keep in mind SRAAM manoeuvres purely through TVC, IRIS-T has surface control+TVC.
I may be mistaken.
i dont get why ppl are getting hung up on max G
because the IRIS-T is specifically designed to provide only the necessary thrust to vector to wherever it needs to before starting properly accelerating, so it dosent need stupidly high G loads
yeah, thrust vectoring is really only useful at low speeds, above mach 1.5ish the fins do most of the work anyway
Also its main strength in ultra-CQB is its slow off the rails (relatively speaking). Doesnt need extremely high G to pull very tight turns
iris t will probably suck anyways since you can flare it in game easily, and wont work against magic forcefield ldircm helicopters
by that logic all of the next gen IR missiles will suck
just wait till planes get em. that’s gonna be fun
I think they took the “half the turn radius of the R-73” and said “that means 100G”. Afaik, IRIS-T should be the tightest turning missile of the bunch, max G is just what people like to compare cuz its easier for them to understand.
there are only 2 planes that could get them to my knowledge (that are relevant for WT)
and the community wont be happy at all, becasue of the nation they belong to
turn radius at what speed though…
like if both missiles max g is 60gs, then at super high speed they’re gonna have the same turning circle.
At low speed it’s not surprising iris-t has smaller turning circle, although does it really matter if missiles can just circle back around with datalink in the modern age?
probably mica ir will be good because it will be buffed 10 times
Likely from the same launch conditions
from what I can tell, the IRIS-T is more of a “won’t miss” missile than a “try a second time” missile. Atleast, that’s what I gather from the stated details we have. Considering a stated secondary design role of the IRIS-T is anti-missile defense for the aircraft, your missile wont really have a second chance to intercept (nor would you realistically want your own missile to come back towards you if it missed an incoming missile the first time…)
that would make sense. although it’s just an “expert” saying it, not actually something from a brochure or anything like that… so can we even take that at face value (although i wouldnt be surprised if it’s close to reality)
iirc, this is a key part of the IRIS-T though. Compared to most of the other IIR missiles, it will be the slowest off the rails, or at least one of the slowest. Where something like ASRAAM is designed to be stupidly fast off the rails, the IRIS-T is meant to be slow to minimise turning radius.
I have no idea what it is though or how it directly compares however. never really looked into it
I was under the impression it had some sort of unique counter-LDIRCM capability and this was why hypothetically the seeker was better technology-wise than ASRAAMs (though that doesn’t actually confirm which is the better seeker as technology generations is not the only factor in what makes a good seeker).